Looking for an answer to this


#1

Hello,

Someone in an atheist board posted the following:

Adam/ Eve’s sin and the torture of Jesus/God = Atonement

God created A&E beings knowing from the start that they would not please him. And when they would not please him, he knew he would have to arrange to have the humans torture and kill him/God in the form of Jesus so that he could forgive them for being the way he created them to be and the way he knew they would be from the beginning. And he knew, at the beginning, that if people did not accept that he would do something so utterly ridiculous, he would have to cast them into hell where they would weep and gnash their teeth in a lake of fire forever.
All this to please his own fragile ego, apparently.

This is the most ridiculous concept I have ever been asked to accept, and I don’t accept it. I cannot accept that an all knowing, all perfect, all good God would be such a sadistic idiot. Apparently Christians can.

God sacrificed himself to himself to satisfy his anger and human beings for being exactly the way he created them to be and for being exactly the way he knew they would be from the beginnning of time. And yet God now threatens to torture people for eternity if they don’t believe that he is stupid enough to do something like this.

It constantly amazes me that Christians can pretend that this makes some kind of sense.

So how can this objection be answered?

Also, if Jesus died for our sins in the cross, then why are we still born in Original Sin? Didn’t he repare what Adam and Eve had ruined? This is what Paul seems to imply…: curious:

Thanks in advance.


#2

IT is a stupid argument…the poster has no idea about what he is talking about. For starters…we were created in God’s image and he intended for us to be sinless…we are capable of being sinless, but we choose not to be…it was man’s disobedience which brought sin into this world. We willfully turn away from God, which is mortal sin…which is what brings about damnation. God does not wish the sinner to die…but to turn back to him and live. Yes…God knows all and he knew in advance that Adam and Eve would betray him…yet due to God’s “Permissive Will”, he did not prevent them from doing such…and to be honest, if there were no original sin, then there would not have been any need for Christ to come and die for us…therefore we would not have any clue as to how much God truly loves us.

The poster of this argument has no understanding of God and he/she mocks what they don’t understand and what they are afraid of…it is easy for them to claim they don’t believe in God, because then they are not held accountable for their actions.

[quote=Asimis]Hello,

Someone in an atheist board posted the following:

So how can this objection be answered?

Thanks in advance.
[/quote]


#3

Ok, but the thing is another question that rised on the same thread:

  1. If Jesus dies for our sin and the whole purpose of the incarnation was to redeem us, then why are we still born in Original sin (if as you say, if there was no Original Sin there would be no need for Christ)?

Also, the argument they posted simply says: God sacrificed himself to himself in order to save us from himself.

[quote=dumspirospero]IT is a stupid argument…the poster has no idea about what he is talking about. For starters…we were created in God’s image and he intended for us to be sinless…we are capable of being sinless, but we choose not to be…it was man’s disobedience which brought sin into this world. We willfully turn away from God, which is mortal sin…which is what brings about damnation. God does not wish the sinner to die…but to turn back to him and live. Yes…God knows all and he knew in advance that Adam and Eve would betray him…yet due to God’s “Permissive Will”, he did not prevent them from doing such…and to be honest, if there were no original sin, then there would not have been any need for Christ to come and die for us…therefore we would not have any clue as to how much God truly loves us.

The poster of this argument has no understanding of God and he/she mocks what they don’t understand and what they are afraid of…it is easy for them to claim they don’t believe in God, because then they are not held accountable for their actions.
[/quote]


#4

And yet they totally leave love out of the equation… :frowning:


#5

[quote=Asimis]Also, the argument they posted simply says: God sacrificed himself to himself in order to save us from himself.
[/quote]

God didn’t save us from Himself, He saved us for Himself. He saved us from sin.


#6

[quote=Asimis]Ok, but the thing is another question that rised on the same thread:

  1. If Jesus dies for our sin and the whole purpose of the incarnation was to redeem us, then why are we still born in Original sin (if as you say, if there was no Original Sin there would be no need for Christ)?

Also, the argument they posted simply says: God sacrificed himself to himself in order to save us from himself.
[/quote]

Christ’s redemption did not automatically remove the stain of original sin from human beings. If that were so, then even Judas would have been saved.

The word redemption doesn’t mean what you think it does. It means Jesus redeemed or made good to God the justice we had violated. It’s like someone else paying a fine for you.

We have salvation and life in his blood, shed for us on the cross, though, which is what the offering of the Eucharist is all about. And he established baptism as the means of removing the stain of original sin. However, this does not remove our tendency to sin. That will only be resolved when we die in a state of grace.

Jesus was not offering himself as one deity to another. He was offering himself as the God-Man. He became a human being to redeem other human beings. Only a perfect human being who was also an eternal being could have satisfied the eternal justice of the eternal God. Our human souls are immortal, but not eternal. We didn’t exist before we were born, an eternal state of being, but Jesus did because he was/is eternal in nature because he is God.


#7

At the time Original Sin was imposed on Mankind due to the sins of Adam and Eve, we were cut off from Heaven…unable to enter. When Christ came and died for us, the gates of Heaven were once again open to us. We are still born in Original Sin due to our first parents, however Original Sin is wiped away by Baptism…Jesus died for all the sins of humankind…our willful turning away from God that prevents us from salvation. Christ died for all the sins that you will commit up until the time you die…they have already been forgiven…

Read the Catechism on these topics or some apologetics books…they will help you…I am not an expert on a lot of this stuff…but some things just simply require Faith…because they are mysteries and can’t be explained…so if this person is lacking in Faith…they will never understand. Faith is a gift from God…it is not something they can learn.

[quote=Asimis]Ok, but the thing is another question that rised on the same thread:

  1. If Jesus dies for our sin and the whole purpose of the incarnation was to redeem us, then why are we still born in Original sin (if as you say, if there was no Original Sin there would be no need for Christ)?

Also, the argument they posted simply says: God sacrificed himself to himself in order to save us from himself.
[/quote]


#8

It’s the old “broken window” analogy that can explain it best. . .

Yep, man sinned. (BTW, a hang-up from the OP is that the atheist poster stated that God “knew in advance” that man would sin. . .but God is not subject to “time” as we know it. God is, was and will be–simultaneously (try to grasp THAT concept). Time is a human creation within the parameters of a finite universe–something God, as Creator, is OUTSIDE of.

But to return. . .man sinned. The mark of that sin remains in all men. God through Jesus Christ REDEEMED mankind; paid the price. Just as if we were children who broke a window, and our Dad paid for the cost of repairing the window. But the window has to be repaired. . .it doesn’t magically “fix” itself. For however long it takes the homeowner to go out and get the glass and whatever else is needed to replace the window, for however long the air blows in, whatever else might happen (it might be a balmy 70 degrees outside, but it might be a bone-chilling 30), there is a physical, a “temporal” consequence to the act which broke the window. And probably Dad isn’t just going to “pay and forget it”, either. We may have to apologize to the homeowner, we may have our allowance docked, we might lose our baseball privileges for x amount of time, etc.

God paid the cost to “repair” our sins in eternity–WE still have to make amends in temporal, “physical”, EARTH time for every consequence of our sins on earth. If we do, well and good. We’ve accepted God’s generous offer, and we’ve said “yes” to His sacrifice. We’re taking responsibility for our actions, acknowledging our guilt, making restitution as far as humanly possible, trying to “be perfect as our Heavenly Father is perfect”.

If we DON’T, if we act as though the sins don’t matter because “we’re saved”, then we’re asking God to bail us out but we’re not taking any responsibility for our actions here-and-now. . .we’re acting like spoiled brats who think, like the old Pharisees, that because we’re supposedly “children of God” that anything goes. Failing to acknowledge one’s sins separates us from God automatically–remember, nothing sinful can enter into the Kingdom. . .so we are then saying, “no thanks” to God’s offer, trying to fool him into thinking that He’s made a DIFFERENT offer–basically, trying to get something (salvation) for nothing.


#9

Thanks for the great explanation tantum :slight_smile:

Now to put it strickly in Catholic terms, I think that it ccan be summed up as:

-God Created Adam And Eve and gave them a commandment.
------Adam And Eve disobeyed the commandment.
------God punishes Adam And Eve and all descendants with original sin.
------God closes Heaven from man.

-God decides to become incarnate in Jesus.
------God (as Jesus) dies on the cross to reedem us from Adam And Eve disobedience.
------God (as Jesus) died for our sins.
------God reopens Heaven from man.

This all seem find and dandy but a couple of questions:

1- Did Adam and Even knew that their disobedience would bring so much pain and misery to their descendants? And that because of it many would end up in Hell? Isn’t the punishment too harsh/unfair considering the consequences? And more when one considers that God knew that all of it was going ot happen?

I don’t know but the issue seems perplexing to me. Hopefully someone can clarify it.

Thanks in advance.


#10

Hi,

Original Sin is a loss of original justice. Adam and Eve were born in God’s shadow. They were born in the grace of God and participated in His life. They willfully rejected His Love and gave up participation in His life. Adam and Eve did not consider the consequences of their actions, they only considered their own pleasure.

And that because of it many would end up in Hell?

This is an assumption. I may be wrong, but I don’t think there is any Catholic doctrine that says that only Adam and Eve would have been tested. Nor does it seem to be God’s way of doing things. In my opinion, the trees of Life and of the Knowledge of God and Evil would have remained in Eden and Adam and Eve’s offspring would have had to face the same temptation they did.

Isn’t the punishment too harsh/unfair considering the consequences?

Seems to me the punishment wasn’t as harsh as one would have assumed. God said, “you will surely die.” If Adam and Eve had died in their sin they would have been automatically condemned to hell. They weren’t. God gave them the opportunity to repent. In fact, they are honored amongst the Catholic Saints.

And more when one considers that God knew that all of it was going ot happen?

The point is that Adam and Eve didn’t know and they made a completely free will choice.

I don’t know but the issue seems perplexing to me. Hopefully someone can clarify it.

It is perplexing. There is a time tested method for clarifying these dilemmas. Prayer. Pray for wisdom and understanding.

Thanks in advance.

I hope this helped.

Sincerely,

De Maria


#11

Greetings, On an atheist board I was discussing with an atheist there and he posted the following:

Claim: The Pope is infallable when he speaks for God.
Fact: There is no litmus test to verify this claim.

Claim: Jesus passed the Church to Peter who passed it to…
Fact: Unverifiable and unreliable. There is no direct testimony from Jesus about his intentions…only what others wrote about him decades after the fact.

I am just looking for input from different perspectives on how you would answer these points.

And another thing:

No, there is not. All Christian sects claim the following: Sole authority on the Word of God. Miracles that “validate” the faith. Visions that are often shoehorned to fit events (see the Fatima “prophecies”). Healings. Reams of documents that are classic examples of circular thinking. The only thing that differentiates the Catholic Church from Rev. Fred’s Tabernacle of Christ is the length of its history and dogmatic details. From a purely objective perspective, there is no solid evidence of any one version of faith being better than any other.

How would you refute this?

Thanks in advance.


#12

Being as I was an atheist for almost half of my life, I think I have an inside track to answering their questions. Atheist tend to be skeptical. Even things which can be proven are questioned. So I don’t waste my time trying to prove anything. I simply question all there beliefs. We have solid evidence which they can disbelieve if they want to. All they have is opinions.

Now we know that our faith is a matter of faith. That is, it is a matter of Divine Revelation which assists reason to understand Supernatural matters. Faith and reason do not contradict. But Faith is greater than reason. Jesus said, “You believe because you see, more blessed he who believes and yet has not seen.”

[quote=Asimis] Claim: The Pope is infallable when he speaks for God.
Fact: There is no litmus test to verify this claim.
[/quote]

I would answer, there is none. Or if there is, you will have to wait til you die and meet your maker to find out.

Claim: Jesus passed the Church to Peter who passed it to…
Fact: Unverifiable and unreliable. There is no direct testimony from Jesus about his intentions…only what others wrote about him decades after the fact.:

Actually there is. The Gospels. Yes the Gospels were written decades after Jesus spoke the words. But are you sincerely requiring more direct evidence than eyewitness testimony. To have more direct evidence you would have to be there yourself.

And another thing:

No, there is not. All Christian sects claim the following: Sole authority on the Word of God.

False. The Protestant sects mostly agree that they don’t have sole authority on the Word of God.

On the other hand, the Catholic Church believes and can prove from Scripture and Tradition that it was given the sole authority to interpret and teach the Word of God infallibly.

Miracles that “validate” the faith. Visions that are often shoehorned to fit events (see the Fatima “prophecies”).

There are pictures and documents by skeptics and atheists who converted because of these events. You should study them yourself.

Many atheists today accept the fact that these events occurred and dismiss them as Extra Terrestrial encounters or UFO sightings but they refuse to give them the true significance revealed to the visionaries themselves.

Healings. Reams of documents that are classic examples of circular thinking. The only thing that differentiates the Catholic Church from Rev. Fred’s Tabernacle of Christ is the length of its history and dogmatic details. From a purely objective perspective, there is no solid evidence of any one version of faith being better than any other.

Actually there is. The problem is that you refuse to accept the evidence.

The only one committing circular thinking here is you. I don’t believe it because I can’t believe it because I can’tt see it. It all comes back to “I”. But the world was here long before you came into existence and you didn’t bring it into existence nor did you bring yourself into existence.

How would you refute this?

I would start at the beginning and ask questions of my own.

My favorite tactic with an atheist is to ask “if the world wasn’t created by God, then who created it?”

Normally they’ll say it happened by random actions, accidents.

So, I’ll be more specific. “you mean that no intelligence went into conceiving your hand and how it works. I’m not even taking into account every single cell in your body, of which there are millions.”

Normally they’ll say “no, it was random.”

then I’ll ask them if any intelligence went into making their shirt or their watch, whatever they have on or whatever they are driving.

Normally they’ll say “yes” a man’s intelligence.

Then I’ll ask which is more intricate, that which was created with no intelligence or that which man’s intellegence made.

Normally, there will be no answer or some befuddled answer to which I’ll respond, "you are a greater believer in miracles than I am. Nothing from nothing brings nothing. If God didn’t create the universe, then the universe wouldn’t exist short of a miracle and what a miracle.

end of conversation.

Remember, I was an atheist and familiarity breeds contempt. When it comes to atheists like myself, the following Scriptural warning applies, “Do not throw your pearls to swine, they do not want them and they will end up by attacking you.”

Its true.

Sincerely,

De Maria


#13

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.